Ian Haywood wrote:
The simplest solution is a 'dictator' type, which most other open-source
projects use, who
can declare solutions by fiat when consensus doesn't emerge naturally.
Horst is the obvious
choice, but the limitation has been his time-availability, it's
difficult to play this role unless
the person is actively involved in coding.
The alternative is a technical panel, which is model followed by
FreeBSD, postgres and a few
other projects, who agree to be bound by a majority vote of the panel.
Is their support for this? Who should be on the panel? I'll kick things
off my nominating Horst, Syan Tan, Tim Churches and Richard Terry.
I would hope that we (donors, enthusiasts) can break with the need to
maintain ultimate control and divest project management to someone who
has a history of successful team leadership and who isn't trying to
balance this job along with 10 GP sessions a week.
Mayby a Jon Patrick, Andrew Schrosbree, even someone like Geoff Sayer
who has industry experience is what we need.
Sure, the natural leaders of the GP community should have influence but
I believe we need to step back a little and manage the core of the
project along true commercial lines even if it is not-for-profit.
There will be ample opportunity for claiming pieces of the spin-offs for
those who want to assume a more hands on role.
Tony
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
